August 25, 2016

Note the Scorpene's similar shape to Australia's future DCNS Barracuda (below). Major similarities between the Barracuda SSN and the Shortfin SSK derivative will be in hull shape and pressure hull steel. (Diagram courtesy of DCNS).

Computer modelling, which is constantly used by commercial and
strategic competitors (think design bureaus in China and Russia) can heavily compensate
for the size difference between Scorpenes and Shortfins. This allows competitors to register similar characteristics and vulnerabilities.

COMMENT

The massive leak of 20,000+ pages of DCNS Scorpene documents
reported overnight is of high value to DCNS's commercial competitors and/or strategic
value to competitors of Scorpene
owning countries. Scorpene owners are Malaysia, India, Chile and Brazil (once
Brazil’s 4 Scorpenes and 1 nuclear Scorpene (SN-BR) are built). The Scorpene’s much smaller size (up to 2,000
tonnes submerged) might have been expected to make them very
different from the (4,500 tonnes submerged) Shortfin-Barracuda SSKs that Australia is buying.

Regarding the similarity of the Scorpene and Shortfin designs it is significant what Sean Costello (CEO DCNS Australia) stated inASPI's The Strategist on 8 April 2016. He wrote: "The main area where Barracuda design references were not used was in the area of the electrical system (batteries and voltage), power generation (induction and diesel generators) and propulsion (main electric motor). In these systems the design reference comes from the Scorpene class of diesel electric submarines, or from an existing submarine technology within DCNS. Existing technologies are re-used in all systems in the Shortfin Barracuda Block 1A. System by system, the whole ship performance is validated and the design loop closed."

If the now known Scorpene characteristics can be related by computer modelling (or directly by Costello of DCNS) to the Shortfin this does not bode well for the Shortfin's future stealth. Computer modelling, which is constantly used by commercial and strategic competitors (think submarine design bureaus in China and Russia) can heavily compensate for the size difference between Scorpenes and Shortfins.

Also the later Scorpene models (for India and Brazil) were designed
over the same period (2000-2010) as the DCNS Barracudas (from which the Shortfin derives).

Major similarities between the Scorpene and the Shortfin will be in hull shape and pressure hull steel - which together influence acoustic and magnetic signatures that an enemy looks for.

BTW - The document leak might also give Pakistan’s competitors
insights into Pakistan’s five DCNS Agosta
class completed 1979-2006. The Agostas completion overlapped with the first
two Scorpenes completed for Chile in 2005 and 2006. Scorpenes and Agostas also share portions of the French SUBTICS combat system (see my details on SUBTICS for Scorpenes and Agostas here).

“India may have a suffered a huge strategic setback,
particularly on the naval front.

Some 22,400 pages of data related to the six
Scorpene-class submarines that the French government-owned company DCNS was
building for the Indian Navy have been leaked, The Australian reported on
Aug.24. “The stunning leak… details the entire secret combat capability of the
six Scorpene-class submarines..,” the report said.

The leaked
documents list out the frequencies at which the submarines gather intelligence
and the levels of noise the subs make at various speeds, the news report said.
They also contain information on the submarine’s diving depths, range, and
endurance, besides its magnetic, electromagnetic, and infrared data.

It is not yet clear how, where, and to whom the
top-secret information was leaked. Nevertheless, India’s naval strategies may suffer
grievously following this development, particularly if the leaked documents are
made available to India’s rivals Pakistan and China.

In a major embarrassment for DCNS Australia’s Uma PatelandStephanie Anderson for ABC News Online, August 24, 2016 report: “French submarine
builder information leak has 'no bearing' on Australia, Malcolm Turnbull says”. Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull has
downplayed the effect of leaks from the French shipbuilder chosen to build
Australia's next generation of submarines.

"The US will be alarmed by the leak of the DCNS data
because Australia hopes to install an American combat system — with the latest
US stealth technology — in the French Shortfin Barracuda. If Washington does not feel confident that its “crown
jewels’’ of stealth technology can be protected, it may decline to give
Australia its state-of-the-art combat system

...DCNS Australia this month signed
a deed of agreement with the Defence Department, ­paving the way for talks over
the contract which will guide the design phase of the new ­submarines.” See WHOLE ARTICLE in The Australian.

12 comments:

Anonymous
said...

Hi Pete

According to THE AUSTRALIAN [1], “We have the highest security protections on all of our defense information, whether it is in partnership with other countries or entirely within Australia,” he (Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull) told the Seven Network today.

Ha ha! That’s a good one. The Australian Federal Police has yet solved a series of consecutive leakages of submarine information by CEP in this year.

Looks like a pretty bad leak which won't help DCNS's efforts to sell more Scorpenes to India (eg. in this competition https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_75I-class_submarine#Contenders ) or to other customers.

The American combat system (I assume a newer variant of AN/BYG-1 already in use with Collins?) I would think would have nothing to do with the stealth of the Shortfin like the article implies but everything to do with how well the sonar suite detects, tracks, and classifies its targets. Which isn't to say it isn't a massively sensitive piece of technology, just that the article seems to mistake the nature of its sensitivity - the same way knowing the exact frequencies and operating principles of Scorpene likely makes it easier to detect (you know what to look for), knowing the ins and outs of an FCS system likely make it easier to mask an opponents position or throw off target motion analysis needed to accurately deploy weapons.

In all likelihood, Shortfin, Barracuda, Scorpene all share many design similarities, built from continuous design improvements as DCNS expertise on fluid dynamics progresses over the years. To the extent that one can get a reasonable close approximation of a submarine shape, competitors sure can coorelate model tank tests to their CFD analyses and learn what a competing submarine can likely do performance wise (at a minimum you can bound the problem). I am sure all submarine design houses do this to some extent.A leak will for sure allow competitors like China to fine tune their own modeling, advance their own design processes (and addresses any potential shortcomings) as well as develop appropriate counter measures.KQN

I think there would be no automatic legal cancellation or compo. More a case of a political groundswell slowing negotiations.

Achieving progress in the SEA 1000 program has across the board political support in Australia.

Political pressure to watch, however, is influential South Australian Senator Xenophon mentioning putting negotiations with DCNS on ice until the leak issue is clarified - see http://gentleseas.blogspot.com.au/2016/08/leak-of-dcns-documents-drama-continues.html

Pete, from what I've read from former Indian sailors, the information contained is primarily company proprietary and not "classified," as per the confidentiality conventions employed by the Indian Navy. So technically, while it is a disturbing fact, the leak isn't going to sink the Indian Scorpenes.

If the enemy getting access to a sub's blueprints were so dangerous, China would never have brought the Kilo class subs (they are the largest operator now) 10 years after India did and India would have retired hers once China got its boats!

20,000 Restricted documents = upgrade to Secret for big players. The real damage of the 20,000 document dump exists for the large, well organised, information collectos of China and Russia - for their militaries' benefit and for their submarine export interests

As my article made clear (especially after what Costello said - now redded) the damage extends to:

Submarine Matters

Director, Submarine Matters International. I analyse international trends, technical and political - mainly on submarines, sometimes on surface ships, aircraft and missiles. This website started in 2007. I have a Masters Degree (International Relations) High Distinction average. The best way to navigate this site is to put a keyword in the search box top left corner.